Dino Rossi refuses to release his federal tax returns; the governor hasn't decided
We asked for them, they refused for now. Here's why that information could be helpful as voters evaluate the GOP challenger and incumbent Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire.
Last week, I e-mailed the campaigns for Washington's leading gubernatorial candidates, Gov. Chris Gregoire and Dino Rossi. I asked for their tax returns for the past four years. I said I wanted them by Wednesday, July 2.
Why would a reporter ask for IRS returns? I can think of any number of reasons. To better understand a candidate's net worth. To see how much a candidate contributes to charity. To determine if there are potential conflicts of interest between a candidate's financial dealings and the office that person is seeking.
Certainly there is a tradition in presidential politics of candidates releasing their income taxes — or at least being asked to.
So what happened to my request? Rossi's campaign flat out denied it. Spokesperson Jill Strait wrote in an e-mail: "Dino has already fully complied with all financial disclosures that are required by the Public Disclosure Commission and therefore will not release any more personal financial information."
Gregoire's communications director, Debra Carnes, said I hadn't given them enough time to address the issue with the governor. "The Governor and her husband are considering it and we should be able to get back to you on Monday," says Carnes.
It's worth noting that in 2004 Gregoire called on Rossi to release his tax returns. He didn't, but Carnes says Gregoire did release hers. I haven't been able to independently verify that.
So at least for now, if you — or I — want to know more about Gregoire and Rossi's financial circumstances, we have to rely on the information provided in the candidates' financial disclosure statements. These are filed with the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC), but they're inconveniently not online. You have to request them.
(Of course, Gregoire's salary is public information. She's paid $163,618, according to her office, which puts her among the best-paid governors in the U.S.)
The PDC's financial disclosure forms are limited. Candidates don't have to disclose actual dollar amounts. Instead, they get to pick a code — A through E — to signify a range that best describes their salary or the value of a particular asset or debt. A is $1-$3,999, E is $100,000 or more. In other words, whether a candidate makes $101,000 or $1 million in a year, he or she uses the same reporting code. You can see it's not terribly helpful.
When I asked the PDC why it doesn't have more codes or categories for reporting, a spokesperson said the commission does make periodic adjustments based on the Consumer Price Index. But she added that the commission had not contemplated going to the Legislature to update the candidate reporting requirements.
So what do the Gregoire and Rossi financial disclosure forms show? Gregoire's salary from being governor is category E ($100,000 or more). Her husband, Mike, reports retirement income in categories D ($40,000-$99,000) and B ($4,000-$19,999). The Gregoires appear to owe $40,000-$99,000 on their private home in Olympia. Gregoire has a state retirement account worth more than $100,000 and several other retirement investments of lesser value.
The most interesting part of Gregoire's financial disclosure report is the gifts she's received. In February 2007, Jack Field, lobbyist for the Washington Cattleman's Association, gave the governor a customized cowboy hat worth $350. In December of that year, Mike Humes of K2 Sports gave the Governor a pair of K2 "Tough Luv" skis worth $949. The disclosure form does not reveal whether the governor has worn the hat or carved turns on the skis.
After a career in state government, Gregoire's financial holdings are, not surprisingly, rather ho-hum. Rossi, however, as a real estate investor, is a potentially more interesting case study.
He reports three sources of income over the $75,000 level (Rossi used an old form where E is $75,000 or more. Gregoire used the new form where E is $100,000 or more.) Those sources are Forward Books (the company that published Rossi's self-titled book), rental income from an apartment building, and a salary from the Forward Washington Foundation (a position Rossi has since resigned). Rossi also reports $30,000-$74,999 in rental income from a medical office building.
Rossi's assets include a state retirement fund, part ownership in the Baseball Club of Everett, and other stock holdings, including $30,000-$74,999 worth of shares of Next IT, a Spokane high-tech firm.
As you can see, these financial disclosure forms provide a window into the candidates' finances, but that's about it. It's unclear, for instance, if Rossi is making a few hundred thousand dollars or millions of dollars off of his book and his real estate investments.
It's a question income tax returns would quickly answer.
So what do you think? Should Washington's gubernatorial candidates release their income tax information? Post your comments below.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Thu, Jul 3, 6:03 a.m. Inappropriate
Why not have the press disclose their tax returns too?: I have often wondered about what drives some in the media, how they are rewarded financially and otherwise. I think the public wants to know about their spouses and parnters assets, contracts and other relationships as well. Maybe it would give the reading public some insight into what drives certain issues in the media. Tell us would someone who works for say TVW as a host be compensated for that position? Would maintaining a non-advisarial relationship with the administration in power be an advantage to someone trying to get movers and shakers in the Government to appear?
Posted Thu, Jul 3, 9:33 a.m. Inappropriate
The correct answer should be...NO.: Federal tax returns are private. Despite being a public figure, any elected official or candidate has the right to expect privacy in some areas of his or her life. This should be a non-issue, but even by asking it becomes an issue if the candidate refuses. The purpose of the PDC process is to identify any malfeasance, although somehow the media seems to think it's their job. I have the greatest respect for this particular reporter, and this level of inquiry is beneath him.
Posted Thu, Jul 3, 11:36 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: The correct answer should be...NO.: So you don't think it's helpful that sitting presidents traditionally release theirs? Are there no circumstances under which this kind of transparency is justified?
Posted Thu, Jul 3, noon Inappropriate
Is an officeholder or candidate beholden to some person or interest? Is there a financial relationship which, if exposed, would compromise the officeholder's capacity to govern?
Potential candidates or appointees often say "No one would submit to the kinds of examinations involved in serving in offce." This is nonsense. There are many public spirited men and women who run for and serve in office and who have nothing whatever to hide. When they try to hide it, warning signals go up.
Posted Fri, Jul 4, 9:50 a.m. Inappropriate
I guess it might have helped in the case of Jim Luce ( Energy facilities Siting Commision Chair) and his wife ( The director of the Washington State Licensing Department). Who have given Thousands in donations to Gregoire and then Jim receives the Patronage job as the head of the Commission. Jim's decisions and influence have landed the people of Washington State in the Supreme Court of Washington trying to defend his illegal actions in overturning
a Kittitas County board on siting a wind farm. Luce had the Governor override the Kittitas board after violating the quasi-judical procedures he was placed in charge of. The best Government money can buy and the money trial is transparent on the PDC website, not an IRS tax form.
Posted Fri, Jul 4, 11:45 a.m. Inappropriate
In Gregoire's case, her wealth has been accumulated by living off taxpayers so maybe her financial records would be more appropriate to disclose than Rossi's.
Posted Fri, Jul 4, 1:52 p.m. Inappropriate
It's also legit to ask whether journalists should be obliged to disclose sources of income, although I suspect many readers would be surprised by how little most reporters make. Plus many news orgs have ethics policies that speak to outside renumeration, quid pro quo's, etc.
Far be it from me to minimize the power of the press, but candidates for public office are a different animal. They forfeit a large measure of privacy. I can't provide a formula, but it seems logical that scrutiny increases with the office. Governors make judicial nominations, pick agency bosses, submit budgets and sign or veto bills.
Austin said he was unable to verify if Gregoire released her federal income tax returns last time she ran. The fact that her communications director said she did is sufficient to make it hard to understand what there is to think about this time. Rossi's refusal speaks for itself, and I wouldn't be surprised if he reconsiders, just as Cindy McCain did.
Posted Sun, Jul 6, 6:30 a.m. Inappropriate
Condemning someone by saying silence means that they have something to hide proves the point. Having money or not having money proves nothing. Maybe a rich uncle who was a notorious womanizer left it to you in his will. How one got their money may make a difference, but the act of condemning someone because they choose to be private is in-itself an act of discrimination.
What's the matter with a little old fashioned journalism? It's called investigative reporting. If something smells fishy start looking. Search existing public records of land ownership or corporate associations. Then apply another old fashioned concept called probable cause. If there is sufficient reason to believe skullduggery exists then maybe income tax returns might shed some light.
There isn't anyone who doesn't have some aspect of their lives they wish weren't public fodder. Good folks make mistakes and most rise above it. There are many aspects of human behavior which have nothing to do with someone's ability to be a good public servant.
Where do we draw the line as to what information is relevant to running for public office? Should candidates submit to DNA testing? How about lie detector tests that ask if they ever stole an apple in a grocery store or peered into the next door neighbors bedroom window? Should candidates be required to swear to their sexual preference?
Next there will be someone who wants all candidates for public office to take and pass the state WASL test and the US citizenship test to be eligible to run for office. Come to think of it maybe this last requirement isn't a bad idea!
Posted Sun, Jul 6, 10:42 a.m. Inappropriate
Having regular shows on the State run media should be considered a sign of lack of independance, a sort of Robert Mak sell out, to the very institutions that the "journalists" are supposed to be monitoring. If you take the money, you are in it for yourself and bulding your own resume. I still think that a review of all income sources for these "journalists" and their spouses is just as applicable as requesting the same level of infomation from electeds. Afterall these people are being paid by the State to present opions and drive certain agendas.
Posted Wed, Jul 9, 2:35 p.m. Inappropriate
Gov. Chris Gregoire released three years of her family's tax returns today. The Gregoires' total income has gone up from $129,073 in 2005, the governor's first year in office, to $180,179 last year.
Posted Sat, Jan 17, 12:37 p.m. Inappropriate
There is a noticeable problem with this in it's entirety. Unless the income recieved by either Gregoire or Rossi is less than $6,000/year, the state constitution has been violated.
Article III, Section 14 states the following:
SALARY. The governor shall receive an annual salary of four thousand dollars, which may be increased by law, but shall never exceed six thousand dollars per annum.
I don't wonder if we would have governors more dedicated to the states good if they were required to take a noticeable pay cut in order to hold the office. I believe the state constitution may be updated to increase the maximum salary of the governor to $50,000/year, but not higher. This should not be an office held for it's salary, but for it's provisioning and enactment of what is right for the people of the state of Washington.
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.